Vocabulary: Ritualism禮學 Purism=fundamentalism晚明復古主義 Linguistic purism乾嘉考據學 Culturalism漢族文化認同 Cultural symbolicism清初禮學代表的文化認同和反滿情緒 Didacticism晚明東林黨清議 Classicism清初經學，特別是考據學 Syncretism三教合一思想 Eclecticism＋skepticism明末至清初宋學傳統中的exegetical scholarship Historical empiricism清初歷史考據學
Fact 1: the rise of ritualism including 1) Yan-Li school in early Qing; 2) ritual studies in the kaozheng school from mid-18 century onward. Fact 2: the rise of lineage in the early Qing; Fact 3: rise of conservatism in Qing ethics and social norms.
Question: what is the relation between ritualism in Qing intellectual history, ethical practices and lineages?
1. Confucian literati and the Imperial State
1) the bureau and the network of patronage became the arena where the competition between two approaches to the Confucian tradition(Han and Song) was fought out. The Han-Song division took place in an institutional context directly and indirectly linked to the state (Qianlong’s patronage for the Han Learning). 2) ritualism contributed to the growth of lineage-oriented ancestral cult, which reshaped the relationship between the imperial state and the gentry at the local level. Lineage empowered gentry against state through Confucian language.
2. The gentry and the common people
Han learning movement as attempts to reassert their elitist role in the social hierarchy. Scholars no longer reached out to the people through unstructured public meetings or social organizations, but through the family, the lineage, and the bureaucracy. Ritual provided a common ground to legitimate their dominance in these realms.
This is a very Confusing study. It is built upon the intellectual history from the late Ming to the late Qing, roughly from xinxue to lixue and to Kaojuxue. Above this, the author brings in lineage and ethics. He tries to bridge ritual in classicism and ritual in lineage building---indeed a great and ambitious project!
The first two chapters brings out the question of Confucian crisis and its didactic response in the late Ming, followed by purist and ritualist responses in the early Qing. Chapter 3-4 deals with lineage---scholar’s participation and discussion in building lineage through ancestral hall and the rituals related. Chapter 5-7 discusses the rise of Kaozheng classicism, and the ritual studies therein, which largely resembled the previous Yan-Li school. The last chapter returns to lineage building, bringing up the topic of women chastity.
What’s confusing about this study is the numerous factors it introduces. Essentially, how does discussion of ritual in intellectual history combine with ritual’s working in lineage building? One simply grows despaired trying to figure out the argument!
I believe this book deserve closer readings. At least, the author notices that fact that patronage of drama shifted mostly from literati to merchants in the Qing. Hardly any kaozheng scholars developed a passion for writing vernacular novels and dramas. The tension between Confucian ritualism and theatrical performance deserve another monograph.